The PokéCommunity Forums Off-Topic Discussions Deep Discussion
Debate We've done this too many times now

Deep Discussion Have a seat at Deep Discussion for in-depth discussions, extended or serious conversations, and current events. From world news to talks on life, growing up, relationships, and issues in society, this is the place to be. Come be a knight.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #51    
Old February 22nd, 2018 (12:14 AM). Edited February 22nd, 2018 by Aliencommander1245.
Aliencommander1245 Aliencommander1245 is offline
     
    Join Date: Dec 2011
    Gender: Male
    Posts: 322
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LDSman View Post
    There is nothing wrong with my sources. What sources would you prefer I use? The pro gun control sites with their bias and lies?
    The cognitive dissonance required to claim anti-gun sites are biased and liars, while pro-gun sites aren't, is genuinely mindboggling and should kind of be a big red flag there

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LDSman View Post
    If my source is lying about the linked item, please feel free to refute the information provided. Simply saying "it's untrustworthy" is not conducive to an interesting debate. "Attacking the source" is simply bad debating. And before anyone goes "but you did it" I provided links that showed where everytown has been caught lying with their numbers.
    Attacking the source isn't bad debating? It should kind of be the cornerstone of debate, given that if your source is bad the information you're working off is bad.

    If you want me to go on specifically about your sources, you linked a reddit comment (???) a "foxnation" website that links to a blank page with "coming soon" written on it, learnaboutguns.com a website literally partnered with the NRA (that gives no sources) and Thetruthaboutguns, which isn't a straight nra mouthpiece as far as i'm aware, has a long and storied history of misleading and abusive practices and pretty much only really exists in the space it does to create a pro-gun narrative through cherrypicking. It's a blog, not exactly something with incredible journalistic integrity.

    You also... didn't link to where people had been "lying about their numbers" you posted a bunch of links showing that incidentally like... three guys who advocate for stronger gun control were involved in crime tangentially linked to guns, or in one case used a gun in a criminal way. Not only is that pretty much a useless point to bring up (Ignoring that you generalised it) because it doesn't actually matter or impact on the discussion at all, but it's kind of a snapshot of your point of view in this discussion, which seems more concerned with point scoring and grandstanding than having an evidence based discussion

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arsenic View Post
    Why? In my state, there are NO state imposed gun laws. Noneski. You do not even need a permit to carry concealed anymore. Yet, last time I checked, we have the third or fourth lowest rate of any type of crime involving firearms. That includes everything from robberies, to even yes, assault and attacks on people.
    I'd question which state you live in then, since as far as i'm aware that's.... just completely untrue? Nothing i've been able to find has indicated that any state with no state imposed gun control laws is anywhere near the top 10 states with the lowest gun deaths

    I mean, realistically, what would even cause that? Why would more access to guns decrease gun crime? If we're subscribing to the myth that owning a gun makes you safer and less likely to be the victim of a murder/robbery/ect there's still a crime comitted by the person before you whip your own gun out and action hero them to death, so there logically shouldn't be less crime.

    I mean, factually, the states with the lowest amounts of gun control have the highest amounts of gun crime so the idea that your state could be a standout utopia seems kind of suspect to me, especially considering the things that raise crime rates (high poverty, ect) not being present in a state shouldn't account for the jump in gun crime that occurs when a state has no gun control vs when it does

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arsenic View Post
    And as much as anyone who brings this up gets called a psycho or conspiracy nut or whatever, the 2nd was also intended as a check on the govt so the people can defend themselves from any leaders who might go the more oppressive dictator route. I hope with all my heart that something like that never need be done though of course.
    It seems kind of outdated then, since beyond empowering domestic terrorist things like the oklahoma bombing, waco, and the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge- it's just impossible to actually do that. It's useless because there's no way a group of people with guns is ever going to be able to fight against the government/the military and warfare/politics/modern life has advanced so far past the historical context of that law that it's completely obsolete. No one is going to grab their musket and join the union against the south anymore, that kind of thing just can't happen with the way the world is built politically, socially and economically

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by S-MAN View Post
    As much as I don't believe it, it might be the case as it is with drugs. I don't remember which country specifically but they made I think all drugs not illegal and in turn that lowered overdoses and drug use in general by a landslide. (Maybe Peru or Brazil?)
    I think what you're thinking of is the idea of decriminalisation and creation of things like needle sharing programs ect, or Portugal's system. That's not just making all drugs legal and going at it, that's just changing policy so having/taking drugs is a health issue rather than a crime (drugs are still illegal, and selling them ect is still a crime). Combined with their strong social safety net of a universal income and changed policies of rehabilitating addicts rather than locking them up (Putting them into rehab, weening them off the drugs ect) they've been pretty effective in treating addiction
    Reply With Quote

    Relevant Advertising!

      #52    
    Old February 22nd, 2018 (6:39 AM).
    Arsenic's Avatar
    Arsenic Arsenic is offline
    Flying High
     
    Join Date: Jun 2011
    Location: In the skies
    Age: 21
    Gender: Male
    Nature: Brave
    Posts: 3,160
    Section Alpha; New Hampshire is where I reside. Unfortunately violent crime seems to have gone up a little since the FBI data I used was posted, but that rise was in parallel to the Opiod Crisis. Maybe that's indicative of larger cause of gun violence? ; D

    Maine is still up in the toppity top rankings though (I mean NH only fell back a few spots anyways not a gun crisis) and they have the same gun laws as us last I checked!



    Section Bravo; The one about fighting a major military machine and winning.

    The Vietnam war and even Afgan/Iraq insurgency would like to have a word with you. Oh, and the WW2 French Resistance.

    There's plenty more examples of major militaries being defeated or stuck in a stalemate with guerrilla forces.

    History class must be wanning in quality...
    __________________
    Reply With Quote
      #53    
    Old February 22nd, 2018 (7:38 AM).
    Aliencommander1245 Aliencommander1245 is offline
       
      Join Date: Dec 2011
      Gender: Male
      Posts: 322
      Quote:
      Originally Posted by Arsenic View Post
      New Hampshire is where I reside. Unfortunately violent crime seems to have gone up a little since the FBI data I used was posted, but that rise was in parallel to the Opiod Crisis.
      Oh, New Hampshire is actually a pretty interesting case now that i'm reading into it. Despite relatively lax gun laws, it's almost completely surrounded by states with stronger gun laws in an inverse of the normal situation. It's gun crime is proportional to it's status with lower crime than average across the board

      This is, mostly, because of what new hampshire is. It's a low population rural state with low levels of poverty (the lowest in the us, in some categories?) and strong education.

      You can see why it's an outlier, because it is in pretty much every respect? I'd imagine stricter gun control would lower it even more, given that you're starting from a position with lower amounts of crime. Crime is less common in rural areas, and more common in cities

      Quote:
      Originally Posted by Arsenic View Post
      Maine is still up in the toppity top rankings though (I mean NH only fell back a few spots anyways not a gun crisis) and they have the same gun laws as us last I checked!
      Maine, again, has a number of factors that means it has proportionally lower amounts of crimes across the board. It's like pointing to a low fat yogurt and claiming that all yogurt has no fat in it, you're starting with somewhere that has low amounts of crime and saying that, because the gun crime in that place is also low, that guns either don't influence crime rate or that no gun restrictions makes gun crime go lower. That's.... just not true? Gun restrictions decrease gun crime, and removing gun control increases it, those are facts



      Quote:
      Originally Posted by Arsenic View Post
      The one about fighting a major military machine and winning.

      The Vietnam war and even Afgan/Iraq insurgency would like to have a word with you. Oh, and the WW2 French Resistance.

      There's plenty more examples of major militaries being defeated or stuck in a stalemate with guerrilla forces.
      None of those are even mildly reasonable examples, given that the Vietnam war was... an actual war between two powers acting as proxies for the cold war powers? And over sixty years ago in an underdeveloped country, too. There's a pretty huge difference between destabilised middle eastern countries toppling a dictator either put there by a foreign power or operating in the vacuum left by one, and none of those situations had the citizens themselves rise up with weapons they already owned?

      I hate arguing this non-point, but what possible fantasy situation in this modern western world would create a dictator that required armed opposition who also doesn't just actually take away your guns anyway? A president that gets voted and has a supermajority in both houses who're also in on their cabal of evil isn't someone you're going to rise up and overthrow, because you had to vote them in and they're controlled by an obtuse amount of democratic paperwork on top of that. They'd also control the largest military in the world, rather than being a destablized middle eastern country with a shaky dictatorial grasp over it, which is probably an issue, i guess.

      It's just an effectively useless sanction of an event that'll pretty much never happen, and the thing it lets happen will happen regardless of whether is exists or not in nigh on impossible situation it stipulates for. Hinging the reason that guns should be allowed on that amendment to the constitution is an incredibly weak argument and lazy argument that doesn't rely on any facts and simply assumes the constitution to be a flawless document, when it literally exists to be iterated on and changed (that's the whole purpose of the amendments)
      Reply With Quote
        #54    
      Old February 22nd, 2018 (4:34 PM).
      JDJacket's Avatar
      JDJacket JDJacket is offline
      Electric Jacket
         
        Join Date: Oct 2016
        Location: Multipliers. Amplifiers.
        Gender: Male
        Nature: Quiet
        Posts: 1,111
        I've gone over this many, many times. I've given data tables from solid sources and have been met with tirades and blocks of text taken from some random dude from facebook, twitter or other with absolutely no ties to any governmental entity whatsoever or worse, third hand articles passed from at least two other sources so at that point it's near fiction.

        If you have absolutely no clue what a firearm is, how they function, how they are obtained (both legally and illegally) you are horribly under-equipped to tackle this topic.

        Rhetoric and wordy posts solve absolutely nothing. If you have no plan, no idea, no suggestions on how, when or what you are no better than the opportunists that stand on the backs of victims to achieve votes and all the glitz and glamour that goes with that sickening practice.

        Blame guns, go right ahead, but no one here on this website has ever come up with what I have deemed even remotely feasible in this country from a common sense stand point.

        What to do with the crkminals? How to stop the criminals from obtaining otherwise illegal firearms (machineguns)? What compensation awill you give to legal owners? Where is your data?

        Where is your data? Where is it? Mine sources were always tied to the FBI, DOJ, and the DHS. The backbone of the United States' law enforcement policies.

        Making wild changes to legal citizens based on poorly researched topics doesn't solve anything.

        The United States has a criminality problem. Last I checked, criminals very rarely follow the law.

        No arguments, no suggestions, no plans, no logistics just some heartfelt words and you won't be seen until the next mass publicized crime. Pretty much a pattern for the vast majority of you. Rather sad.
        __________________
        Reply With Quote
          #55    
        Old February 22nd, 2018 (6:16 PM).
        Aliencommander1245 Aliencommander1245 is offline
           
          Join Date: Dec 2011
          Gender: Male
          Posts: 322
          Quote:
          Originally Posted by JDJacket View Post
          The United States has a criminality problem. Last I checked, criminals very rarely follow the law.
          This is an incredibly intellectually dishonest argument that does exactly what you're railing against. "Criminals will always do crime" is true, but the idea that no matter what criminals will always be able to get the same amount of guns with the same amount of ease is just a fantasy with no basis in fact. Stricter restrictions about buying and selling guns + gun ownership will take guns out of the hands of criminals and make it harder for them to get a hold of them.

          Criminals aren't wizards that conjure guns out of thin air with a spell they all know, all guns start somewhere being built legally and have to change hands to get into that of a criminal. Criminals might break the law, but i'd wager it's better for registered gun owners and gun dealers to follow the law rather than to break it and illegally sell guns to criminals, but only if there's actual legal consequences, legal oversight to catch them doing it, and registers to ensure the people with the guns are the ones that should be owning it.


          Quote:
          Originally Posted by JDJacket View Post
          No arguments, no suggestions, no plans, no logistics just some heartfelt words and you won't be seen until the next mass publicized crime. Pretty much a pattern for the vast majority of you. Rather sad.
          Isn't that exactly what you're doing, though? Rather than making vague generalisations that claim everyone here is virtue signaling that they think mass murder is bad, where's your solution? Because so far, given the tone of that post, your solution seems to be upholding the status quo and mocking anyone with any desire for change
          Reply With Quote
            #56    
          Old February 22nd, 2018 (6:51 PM).
          Paige's Avatar
          Paige Paige is offline
           
          Join Date: Jun 2009
          Age: 29
          Posts: 930
          I honestly support stricter background checks, but I'm not to big on banning various type of guns myself. Yeah it is going overboard buying a assault rifle still, but if the owner is a law abiding citizen why should they really care what type of gun they own?
          __________________

          Reply With Quote
            #57    
          Old February 23rd, 2018 (1:57 PM).
          JDJacket's Avatar
          JDJacket JDJacket is offline
          Electric Jacket
             
            Join Date: Oct 2016
            Location: Multipliers. Amplifiers.
            Gender: Male
            Nature: Quiet
            Posts: 1,111
            Quote:
            Originally Posted by Aliencommander1245 View Post
            This is an incredibly intellectually dishonest argument that does exactly what you're railing against. "Criminals will always do crime" is true, but the idea that no matter what criminals will always be able to get the same amount of guns with the same amount of ease is just a fantasy with no basis in fact. Stricter restrictions about buying and selling guns + gun ownership will take guns out of the hands of criminals and make it harder for them to get a hold of them.

            Criminals aren't wizards that conjure guns out of thin air with a spell they all know, all guns start somewhere being built legally and have to change hands to get into that of a criminal. Criminals might break the law, but i'd wager it's better for registered gun owners and gun dealers to follow the law rather than to break it and illegally sell guns to criminals, but only if there's actual legal consequences, legal oversight to catch them doing it, and registers to ensure the people with the guns are the ones that should be owning it.
            There is very little here to dissuade me from, again, making the claim that criminality is not the main issue. If you make the claim that 'all guns start somewhere and are built legally' your colours are showing. No, the answer is not all firearms are manufactured legally. Millions have been funnelled from China through smugglers and otherwise. Making the statement that making them harder to obtain will also affect criminals is absolutely ridiculous for one simple reason: machineguns.

            Please explain to me how an already illegal weapon, which is banned across the board (for all machineguns not grandfathered in '82) within the United States makes it's way into the hands of street thugs.

            What's more is that even if I grant you leeway and say "Here, take all the 'assault weapons' from everybody in the United States" You are now left with a staggering 98% left to deal with. Handguns account for that 98% give or take 1-2%~

            Now, after this is all said and done, further explain how you will reduce the remaining 80~90% of firearm homicides which are commited by felonious individuals (already banned from firearm ownership) and other gang and drug affiliated homicides.

            Your proposal is to affect change through quashing a 1~10% minority how is this reasonable in the slightest or even practical?

            If, let's say for the sake of argument, that any and all legal weapons registered are taken back, you're looking at roughly one third of the estimated firearms in the United States (roughly 270M~). But here's the thing: no forced recall ever works. Instead of having a clean-cut you're also looking at flooding the black market with more guns because your compensation is probably going to be non-existent or laughable.

            Keep in mind, if you do offer 'compensation' from the tax payers you are essentially telling them to pay the government for taking their property.

            Hence the 'no logistics' argument. And as such, I can fully declare you have proffered no such argument in way of logistics or practicality. Thus 'no plan' and merely, as I said, just words.

            It is not I you must convince, because I'm not delusional enough to take on a 66% majority against a full on ban. They've tried a full on ban within California and it failed miserably.

            Much of what you've done is much ado about nothing aside from reaffirm my position that if you have no plan, nothing will come from handing me blocks of text especially when I know enough to spot someone who hasn't enough experience to discuss firearms on a whole.

            Assault weapons crack me up son.
            __________________
            Reply With Quote
              #58    
            Old February 23rd, 2018 (2:04 PM).
            Arsenic's Avatar
            Arsenic Arsenic is offline
            Flying High
             
            Join Date: Jun 2011
            Location: In the skies
            Age: 21
            Gender: Male
            Nature: Brave
            Posts: 3,160
            Um, I hate to tell ya, but out of our bordering states of Vermont, Maine, and Massachusetts, only MA has noticeably stricter gun laws (I think Maine forbids you to hunt with Automatics and carry concealed in some restaurants but that's all I can think of)

            Also would you mind elaborating on "rural characteristic" because it's sounding like you're implying there is some other issue causing people to murder each other that "rural states" are lacking.


            On the wars;

            Vietnam war; American war machine got beat by guerilla warfare. The geopolitical reasoning for the war is irrelevant to this argument, as well as the development of the country. I'm also not sure why how long ago it was matters? I wasn't aware that forms of warfare spoiled over time like deli meat.

            The Iraq insurgency (not to be confused with the gulf war or the beginning of the second Iraq war where we were fighting a professional military.) where we yet again got our butts kicked and then fought back to a stalemate with Guerrilla fighters (Or Insurgents, Jihadis, whatever you like to call them) until our withdrawl when all those guys in hiding popped back up with fresh mags.

            French resistance is the same thing. Nazi war machine couldn't beat guerrilla warfare.

            A traditional army has a very hard time winning when they can't make a front line.

            And I don't fantasize about a possible situation like this in the states as I'm not a tinfoil hatter. I just don't dismiss history like all you people do. History repeats because of people who ignore it.


            And finally, if you had read above at the other things I'd said you'd know I am fine with tweaking it. I've thrown around a couple common ideas, but upon further thought I think the best course of action is to make semi-autos Class 3 items, but still legal in all states. Restrict owning one to 21y or older; UNLESS you are enlisted in the USAF or NG or honorably discharged (because if you can die for our country with a gun you should be able to own one)

            While I'm at it any one who is enlisted or was enlisted (save dishonorable discharge) should be able to own a post-'87 automatic. Maybe even cops too when they get to a certain rank (so you don't have a bunch of people join the PD just to own an auto)

            I totally disprove of any federally mandated outright ban. And really anything more intense than my idea on a federal level. If states want to do it themselves that may be ok, but every state is different and states that for the most part are not causing a problem should not be impacted because another state has a problem (though cross border transfers would have to be tackled in this situation)

            That's my two cents.
            __________________
            Reply With Quote
              #59    
            Old February 23rd, 2018 (2:07 PM).
            LDSman LDSman is offline
               
              Join Date: Dec 2017
              Posts: 92
              On mobile so I can’t reply to everything I want to but I wished to point out that not all firearms are made legally.
              Google illegal gun factory or zip guns.

              The US doesn’t see many homemade zip guns or even the rather well done knockoffs that the countries with stricter gun control laws see.

              India, the Phillipines, China, and even places in the US have made arrests of people illegally making guns.
              Not just putting parts together but full bore manufacturing.
              Reply With Quote
                #60    
              Old February 23rd, 2018 (3:56 PM).
              Arsenic's Avatar
              Arsenic Arsenic is offline
              Flying High
               
              Join Date: Jun 2011
              Location: In the skies
              Age: 21
              Gender: Male
              Nature: Brave
              Posts: 3,160
              Quote:
              Originally Posted by LDSman View Post
              On mobile so I can’t reply to everything I want to but I wished to point out that not all firearms are made legally.
              Google illegal gun factory or zip guns.

              The US doesn’t see many homemade zip guns or even the rather well done knockoffs that the countries with stricter gun control laws see.

              India, the Phillipines, China, and even places in the US have made arrests of people illegally making guns.
              Not just putting parts together but full bore manufacturing.
              I gotcha bruh



              Sorry it's a VICE documentary. It's super biased to the left but this is just an example anyways. From 2013
              __________________
              Reply With Quote
                #61    
              Old February 23rd, 2018 (4:00 PM).
              LDSman LDSman is offline
                 
                Join Date: Dec 2017
                Posts: 92
                Quote:
                Originally Posted by Arsenic View Post
                I gotcha bruh



                Sorry it's a VICE documentary. It's super biased to the left but this is just an example anyways. From 2013
                The ones I’m referring to aren’t even 3D printed. Straight machine shop stuff.
                Things like this:

                https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-11-13/farmers-copying-guns-at-home-make-philippines-deadlier-than-u-s-
                Reply With Quote
                  #62    
                Old February 24th, 2018 (10:40 AM).
                JDJacket's Avatar
                JDJacket JDJacket is offline
                Electric Jacket
                   
                  Join Date: Oct 2016
                  Location: Multipliers. Amplifiers.
                  Gender: Male
                  Nature: Quiet
                  Posts: 1,111
                  Quote:
                  Originally Posted by LDSman View Post
                  The ones I’m referring to aren’t even 3D printed. Straight machine shop stuff.
                  Things like this:

                  https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-11-13/farmers-copying-guns-at-home-make-philippines-deadlier-than-u-s-
                  Pretty much this exactly. Chinese 'knockoffs' can kill just as effectively as full bore made in a legitimate factory weapons. This is a common issue that I've argued against before. If some illiterate farmer can make a gun in his barn then what is going to stop some guy in his garage from making an AK-47 out of a shovel in his garage?

                  I feel like at this point we're arguing with children that have no clue as to how this entire business functions. Their hearts are in the right place, as no one here wants other people murdered for the sake of murder (or any other reason for that matter) but there is a major disconnect where (and when, if applicable) the rubber meets the road.

                  What's more, is the simple fact is that if guns are so easy to get now here in 2018, then why is the overall homicide rate declining since 1994? And almost as low as 1950s homicide rates?

                  There was that full on 'Assault Weapons Ban' for an entire decade and the homicide rate was higher with the ban than without one? Especially when the population has increased multiplicatively and not decreased in any way.

                  What truly sickens me is that the vast majority of the anti-gunners only care about the massive media coverage but give no credence to folk in the inner cities and other problem areas that are shot at on a daily basis by gang bangers and thugs . . . with illegal firearms.
                  __________________
                  Reply With Quote
                    #63    
                  Old February 24th, 2018 (11:20 AM).
                  EvilChameleon's Avatar
                  EvilChameleon EvilChameleon is offline
                  Just call me EC.
                   
                  Join Date: Feb 2016
                  Location: Youngstown, Ohio
                  Age: 27
                  Gender: Male
                  Posts: 4,941
                  Companies dropping the NRA like crazy. Good to see everyone waking up across the country and seeing this "organization" for what they really are; an extremist domestic terrorist group funded by, as it turns out, the Russians!

                  Change has begun, and it started with these high school kids speaking up and refusing to be quiet and go away. Marches are next. Walk outs. Demonstrations. Protests. More companies dropping the NRA. Even the president is willing to sign legislation increasing the age of purchase, banning bump stocks, etc.

                  No. More.
                  __________________
                  For some people, small, beautiful events are what life is all about.
                  Reply With Quote
                    #64    
                  Old February 24th, 2018 (4:45 PM). Edited February 24th, 2018 by ShinyUmbreon189.
                  ShinyUmbreon189's Avatar
                  ShinyUmbreon189 ShinyUmbreon189 is offline
                  VLONE coming soon
                     
                    Join Date: Mar 2012
                    Location: Chicago
                    Age: 26
                    Gender: Male
                    Nature: Relaxed
                    Posts: 1,407
                    Quote:
                    Originally Posted by Arsenic View Post
                    I don't know, you could cause quite a few casualties as well as gruesome injuries with a cannon loaded with grapeshot, which are still, and were intended to be upon it's original writing, protected under the second amendment.
                    Almost anything can be a weapon if used properly. Some of these killers are complete masterminds. Take the OKC bombing for example.. At least 160 deceased, more than any massacre from guns and nobody saw it coming and guns weren't even involved in the massacre.

                    Quote:
                    Why? In my state, there are NO state imposed gun laws. Noneski. You do not even need a permit to carry concealed anymore. Yet, last time I checked, we have the third or fourth lowest rate of any type of crime involving firearms. That includes everything from robberies, to even yes, assault and attacks on people. Your "Evil devil black military semi-automatic assault killing machine" is something I grew up around (And I still enjoy going to the range to keep some semblance of marksman skill). I mean pretty much everyone I know has some experience with bolt and/or semi-autos. Hell, I plan on very soon even getting my own! Sig MCX Virtus, and I'm going for a Class 3 license so I can get it with a 10" SBR config and a silencer.
                    I've noticed this too. Generally, states with stricter gun laws have higher crime rates from firearms, (tho population of cities can make a difference) because at this point criminals know a majority are unarmed.

                    When I lived in Indiana, I saw many people walking around with a pistol in their holster, as well as Missouri. Nobody freaked out, or if they did they were your typical anti-gun activists that doesn't understand why the person is carrying a firearm. These people have a gun not only for their safety, but to make others feel more safe. But for some reason liberals seem to think that if someone's carrying around a firearm they intend on using it. No, they don't. I can see why some people could get intimidated, but they need to learn to understand that, that person carrying a firearm on their hip is an law abiding citizen, not a criminal. These people pray they never have to pull their gun on someone to protect themselves, their family, or even a complete stranger. Firearms in the possession of responsible law abiding citizens that know gun safety, is no threat, and can make the vicinity a safer place. Please don't say, "They'll get drunk and reckless and wave their gun around". Because, NO THEY WON'T. But guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, can be a threat and turn into complete chaos.

                    Also here in Illinois, there is no open carry, and a concealed carry license is extremely hard to get. Here, you need a FOID card (only state) to even purchase a gun or even touch guns in this state. Which requires at least 2 weeks to either be accepted or denied and there's testings for safety and few other tests as well as extensive background checks. What's funny tho.. Chicago has the highest murder rate in the country from guns, yet the hardest to obtain here, but not for criminals!

                    Quote:
                    And as much as anyone who brings this up gets called a psycho or conspiracy nut or whatever, the 2nd was also intended as a check on the govt so the people can defend themselves from any leaders who might go the more oppressive dictator route. I hope with all my heart that something like that never need be done though of course.
                    I'm as well a firm believer in our 2nd Amendment. But the US military has beyond what any citizen has when it comes to firearms. We wouldn't accomplish much. Just being realistic here, but it's our morals that make a difference.
                    The weaponry the US military has is frightening as psyduck. If they really wanted to, they could wipe out the population. It doesn't matter the amount of guns in our country. Not everyone knows how to shoot a gun, lots would be afraid, leaving only the ones that would risk their lives for their rights and the rights of others.
                    But if a scenario like that were to happen. The military would split.


                    Quote:
                    On the other hand, I'm all for more intense background checks and additional state-handled legislation for states that need it. The background checks to get a NFA Class 3 license are pretty thorough so maybe something like that needs to implemented f or all firearms purchases. I'm sure there are plenty of other options to consider as well (as long as I can put my say into whether I think we should have it or not)
                    I as well believe in stricter testings to get a gun, but it's not as easy as it sounds. Most mental illnesses are undiagnosed or misdiagnosed. What good does psychological testings really do at this point? You can't just "watch" someone for 2 weeks to a month to find out if they're "mentally ill" or not. That would be invasion of privacy.

                    I also want to add something.. Instead of banning guns or desperately pushing for gun control. PUT METAL DETECTORS IN PSYDUCKING SCHOOLS! Nobody would be dumb enough to shoot up a school knowing there's metal detectors, and security guards waiting for that idiot to try. Just like nobody's dumb enough to run up on a stranger that's armed! Signs stating it's a gun free zone doesn't stop them, obviously. Murder being a capital and heinous crime at that, doesn't stop them. When was the last time you heard of someone shooting up a place that had metal detectors? But I guess they're more worried about "gang violence" in bad neighborhoods and put metal detectors in those schools instead of safe neighborhoods. No, put them in all our schools! Why isn't this a thing? Oh wait, gun controls part of their agenda I forgot, and I'm sure tax payers wouldn't mind a tiny increase in taxes for a short period of time to make sure our children are more safe. If I had children, I'd feel more safe them being in a school with metal detectors than in a school without, sadly.

                    There's over 200 million guns in America. If guns were the problem there would me MANY more deaths per year from guns. Given the population and the amount of people murdered from firearms in a given year, is such a miniscule scale compared to the rest of the population. And most gun violence, is gang violence. Btw, there's not as many "massacres" as the media tries to portray. Yeah, there's been a lot of massacres in America and I'm as heartbroken as everybody else but there's a pattern in the media that anti-gun activists don't see. All the media talks about is "we need gun control" rather than coming up with "realistic" solutions to the problem, and these are the same people that's trying to change or erase history! Those deaths in the percentage to general gun violence in this country isn't even a fraction.. And as I said. Most gun violence is gang violence. Which are CRIMINALS!!

                    Besides, only 3-18 or so percent of the murders are caused by legal gun owners. Rest are illegally owned.

                    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/new-evidence-confirms-what-gun-rights-advocates-have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/?utm_term=.91fd89a682e0
                    Reply With Quote
                      #65    
                    Old February 25th, 2018 (7:23 AM). Edited February 25th, 2018 by Nah.
                    Nah's Avatar
                    Nah Nah is offline
                     
                    Join Date: Nov 2013
                    Age: 26
                    Gender: Female
                    Posts: 12,520
                    Quote:
                    Originally Posted by EvilChameleon View Post
                    Companies dropping the NRA like crazy. Good to see everyone waking up across the country and seeing this "organization" for what they really are; an extremist domestic terrorist group funded by, as it turns out, the Russians!

                    Change has begun, and it started with these high school kids speaking up and refusing to be quiet and go away. Marches are next. Walk outs. Demonstrations. Protests. More companies dropping the NRA. Even the president is willing to sign legislation increasing the age of purchase, banning bump stocks, etc.

                    No. More.
                    I'm pretty sure that companies cutting ties with the NRA en masse has a lot more to do with the US's deep-seated dislike of Russia, as well as pressure from the companies' consumers, than that they've "seen the NRA for what it really is" or something.

                    Quote:
                    Originally Posted by JDJacket View Post
                    What truly sickens me is that the vast majority of the anti-gunners only care about the massive media coverage but give no credence to folk in the inner cities and other problem areas that are shot at on a daily basis by gang bangers and thugs . . . with illegal firearms.
                    I'm just gonna take a bit to expand on what JD is saying here. Talks about gun violence in America and gun control in America usually crop up whenever one of these highly televised mass shootings occur. When talking about gun control, it seems that most people focus on rifles and the term semi-automatic is often thrown about.
                    But: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls
                    Rifles make up a fraction of the gun-related homicides in the USA. Consistently (I remember seeing a table that was 2010-2014 instead and 2010 and 2011 showed the same pattern). The vast majority of gun deaths come from handguns. Even if we were to be very generous and assume that 90% of the gun homicides where the firearm type is unknown/unstated were with "assault rifles", it still ends up being that 2 to 3 times more people are killed each year via handguns than with rifles.

                    Yet it seems that few people, if any, call for stricter gun control regarding handguns. Nobody appears to talk about all the random individuals killed all the time by your run of the mill criminal. Lot of it probably has to do with the fact that the news doesn't report much on it--"some guy killed by some thug with a handgun, like basically every day here" doesn't draw in views and generate emotion in people the same way as "9 children and a teacher murdered in latest school shooting, AR-15 used!" does. So there is a little truth to what he's saying in that particular part of his post I would think.

                    ----

                    It might sound like it, but my intent is not really to take a side here, I'm just trying to participate in the discussion is all. I'm not going to pretend that I'm so well informed that I can say with great confidence that X is certainly the solution and Y is certainly not. I'm not going to pretend that what I think or say even really matters--I'm just some random rattata on the internet. But what I do know is that a lot of people needlessly die in this country, and something needs to be done about it. Over the past several years it feels like either nothing has been done or attempts to do anything have been blocked by one part of the government or another. Need to try something at this point (doing nothing rarely solves problems), whether it's more gun control or arming teachers or whatever. Even if whatever is the first thing tried doesn't work out, there is at least some small value in that in that we can say "well, we now know that doesn't work, let's try one of the other things now".

                    ----

                    small miscellaneous side things:
                    a) regarding states with stricter/less strict gun laws have more/less gun crime, which is it really?
                    b) what is a bump stock (I think I have some idea of what a stock is on a gun in general) and why is this on people's short list of things to ban regarding guns lately?
                    __________________
                    Nah ンン
                    “No, I... I have to be strong. Everyone expects me to."
                    Reply With Quote
                      #66    
                    Old February 25th, 2018 (7:51 AM).
                    Arsenic's Avatar
                    Arsenic Arsenic is offline
                    Flying High
                     
                    Join Date: Jun 2011
                    Location: In the skies
                    Age: 21
                    Gender: Male
                    Nature: Brave
                    Posts: 3,160
                    Quote:
                    Originally Posted by Nah View Post
                    ----

                    small miscellaneous side things:
                    a) regarding states with stricter/less strict gun laws have more/less gun crime, which is it really?
                    b) what is a bump stock (I think I have some idea of what a stock is on a gun in general) and why is this on people's short list of things to ban regarding guns lately?
                    I'm on a tenno at work RN so I can answer these.

                    A.) Depends on a lot of factors. I think primarily culture. Like I said above other than MA I'm surrounded by mostly unregulated states including mine, yet my state has the third lowest crime rate in the country (which shows guns are only a part of the equation.

                    B.) More or less a rife stock that lets your hand bump back and forth like it had an elastic in it. It lets you pull the trigger on a semi auto really fast.
                    __________________
                    Reply With Quote
                      #67    
                    Old February 25th, 2018 (9:31 AM). Edited February 25th, 2018 by ShinyUmbreon189.
                    ShinyUmbreon189's Avatar
                    ShinyUmbreon189 ShinyUmbreon189 is offline
                    VLONE coming soon
                       
                      Join Date: Mar 2012
                      Location: Chicago
                      Age: 26
                      Gender: Male
                      Nature: Relaxed
                      Posts: 1,407
                      Quote:
                      Originally Posted by Nah View Post

                      I'm just gonna take a bit to expand on what JD is saying here. Talks about gun violence in America and gun control in America usually crop up whenever one of these highly televised mass shootings occur. When talking about gun control, it seems that most people focus on rifles and the term semi-automatic is often thrown about.
                      But: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls
                      Rifles make up a fraction of the gun-related homicides in the USA. Consistently (I remember seeing a table that was 2010-2014 instead and 2010 and 2011 showed the same pattern). The vast majority of gun deaths come from handguns. Even if we were to be very generous and assume that 90% of the gun homicides where the firearm type is unknown/unstated were with "assault rifles", it still ends up being that 2 to 3 times more people are killed each year via handguns than with rifles.
                      Thing is, in most states.. These fully auto rifles are already illegal. A very small percentage of the population of gun owners actually has the proper licensing to own such weaponry, and they're not the ones committing crimes with these firearms, the criminals that have access to them through other sources are. Last I checked you need a type I federal as well as a class III license. These are not only difficult to obtain, (requires many testings) but also very expensive as well. But a criminal or some loonie that can't obtain one, but wants one, will obtain a firearm regardless of the laws. Gang bangers have AK 47's and Uzi's for more firing power, they don't just have pistols. They will get one one way or another. If a criminal had the money and really wanted to, they could purchase a rocket launcher through the black market. Which are illegal, just sayin.

                      Quote:
                      Yet it seems that few people, if any, call for stricter gun control regarding handguns. Nobody appears to talk about all the random individuals killed all the time by your run of the mill criminal. Lot of it probably has to do with the fact that the news doesn't report much on it--"some guy killed by some thug with a handgun, like basically every day here" doesn't draw in views and generate emotion in people the same way as "9 children and a teacher murdered in latest school shooting, AR-15 used!" does. So there is a little truth to what he's saying in that particular part of his post I would think.
                      Truth be told.. Media don't care about crime committed by thugs, it's not part of their agenda. America has more of a gang problem than a gun problem but the media obviously ignores this. They ignore black on black crime like it doesn't exist, only focus on white on black, police on black, etc because they want to keep racial inequality intact in this country and we allow it to happen. Then of course, when school shootings happen they wanna scream "gun control" without looking at the root of the problem instead make assumptions that aren't true because we're too brainwashed to notice we're being manipulated through the media. They just tend to over exaggerate the truth A LOT . Wanna stop children from getting massacred in schools? Put metal detectors in our schools, it's common sense really. But you never see the media talking about that. Also, stop making these killers famous. If the media quit targeting this as their agenda to push for gun control, you'd be surprised at what happens.

                      ----

                      Quote:
                      It might sound like it, but my intent is not really to take a side here, I'm just trying to participate in the discussion is all. I'm not going to pretend that I'm so well informed that I can say with great confidence that X is certainly the solution and Y is certainly not. I'm not going to pretend that what I think or say even really matters--I'm just some random ***** on the internet. But what I do know is that a lot of people needlessly die in this country, and something needs to be done about it. Over the past several years it feels like either nothing has been done or attempts to do anything have been blocked by one part of the government or another. Need to try something at this point (doing nothing rarely solves problems), whether it's more gun control or arming teachers or whatever. Even if whatever is the first thing tried doesn't work out, there is at least some small value in that in that we can say "well, we now know that doesn't work, let's try one of the other things now".
                      Thing is, government could care less about our safety. They only care about money and power, they're an evil organization controlled by evil people.
                      All they wanna do is fear monger the population with scare tactics to keep us distracted from what's actually going on and most get blindly sucked into this deception, It's called "fake news" for a reason. Not because we're "conspiracy theorists". Been telling most you guys this for years now, and look where America's at. It's all part of their agenda, doesn't take a genius to realize this.

                      Also, there's no need to arm teachers, but it could be an option. As I said, put metal detectors in schools and have armed security guards. Put 2 exit doors in classrooms and if the teachers wish to be armed, I don't see why not.

                      And to you anti-gun activists.. A teacher having a firearm for safety is no different than a law abiding legal gun owner having a firearm therefore making them a hypocrite. Nobody should be getting "special treatment" when it comes to firearms. Frankly, I'd bet half our teachers never shot or gun, or are against guns. Most teachers in all sections of education, have liberal views after all.
                      Reply With Quote
                        #68    
                      Old February 27th, 2018 (10:00 AM).
                      Esper's Avatar
                      Esper Esper is offline
                       
                      Join Date: Jun 2009
                      Location: California
                      Posts: 10,761
                      I regret making this thread. Thought this time it would be different.

                      Quote:
                      Originally Posted by Nah View Post
                      small miscellaneous side things:
                      a) regarding states with stricter/less strict gun laws have more/less gun crime, which is it really?
                      b) what is a bump stock (I think I have some idea of what a stock is on a gun in general) and why is this on people's short list of things to ban regarding guns lately?
                      a) The states with least strict gun purchasing laws have the highest gun death ratio to population.

                      https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm

                      For example, the 5 highest gun death rates were (per 100,000 people, based on 2016 data): Alaska (23.3), Alabama (21.5), Louisiana (21.3), Mississippi (19.9), and Oklahoma (19.6). The lowest were Connecticut (4.6), Hawaii (4.5), New York (4.4), Rhode Island (4.1), and Massachusetts (3.4).

                      b) Bump stocks are parts that can be added to a semi-automatic weapon to make it shoot as fast as an automatic weapon. It's what the shooter in Las Vegas last year used.

                      Luckily, it looks like there is a chance to get those restricted/removed/outlawed/etc. since the NRA apparently doesn't sell very many of them and is looking for some good PR with a token effort.
                      __________________
                      Reply With Quote
                        #69    
                      Old February 27th, 2018 (12:11 PM). Edited February 28th, 2018 by JDJacket.
                      JDJacket's Avatar
                      JDJacket JDJacket is offline
                      Electric Jacket
                         
                        Join Date: Oct 2016
                        Location: Multipliers. Amplifiers.
                        Gender: Male
                        Nature: Quiet
                        Posts: 1,111
                        Quote:
                        Originally Posted by Esper View Post
                        I regret making this thread. Thought this time it would be different.



                        a) The states with least strict gun purchasing laws have the highest gun death ratio to population.

                        https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm

                        For example, the 5 highest gun death rates were (per 100,000 people, based on 2016 data): Alaska (23.3), Alabama (21.5), Louisiana (21.3), Mississippi (19.9), and Oklahoma (19.6). The lowest were Connecticut (4.6), Hawaii (4.5), New York (4.4), Rhode Island (4.1), and Massachusetts (3.4).

                        b) Bump stocks are parts that can be added to a semi-automatic weapon to make it shoot as fast as an automatic weapon. It's what the shooter in Las Vegas last year used.

                        Luckily, it looks like there is a chance to get those restricted/removed/outlawed/etc. since the NRA apparently doesn't sell very many of them and is looking for some good PR with a token effort.
                        There is a side note in the source you posted by the CDC stating that smaller state firearm related deaths may not be entirely reliable duebto massive population differences.

                        Further more there is no extrapolation of data in your source. Firearm related homicide and firearm related suicide are both firearm related deaths but wildly different beasts.

                        Is there a table that they show the difference between the two? What were to happen if I found a suicide map and overlayed that on the 'high gun death' states? Would suicides correllate with firearm suicides?

                        Why does saying Alaska has a gun violence problem when like, eight people live in the entire state help? What does it prove? Is there any evidence other than this source? Where is the violent crime statistic for Alaska? Is it a trend? Trending up? Down?

                        I absolutely loathe the 'gun death' statistic as all it does is show X amount of people died with bullets. It doesn't give accidental deaths nor homicides or suicides or even what type of firearm. While the CDC has some nice graphs and data, I feel that you have misused their data table and haven't proven much.

                        Would it be fair to require all of the US to carry around snow chains in their car because of some random accident in Alaska? Despite there being only three people in the entire state? (five recently died due to hazerdous road conditions).

                        This debate is about homicide and as such, I must discount the 'gun death' table, as they do not explain who, what, where or when, with what, or how. Crucial components to actually crafting a law.

                        There is nothing to regret here. There are plenty of sources available to you for free to fully research this topic from reliable, law enforcement and governmental websites.

                        Do you only care when a shooter makes it on tv? If so, you'll never, ever make a change. If you care about the daily life of millions of Americans, like myself, you'll try to combat actual criminals and not the lone wolf individuals, as that leads to nowhere fast.

                        Gangland is responsible for roughly 80% of all firearm related homicide. I posted these sources about a month or so ago so itll take me a time to find the posts.

                        I'll try and find them by the end of today.

                        edit: didn't make it back until 0200. Soon, is the answer. If you are so inclined, you can find them in my previous posts. Shouldn't be too hard to find. I believe tgey're under the 'repeal tge 2nd amendment' thread.
                        __________________
                        Reply With Quote
                          #70    
                        Old February 28th, 2018 (11:35 AM).
                        LDSman LDSman is offline
                           
                          Join Date: Dec 2017
                          Posts: 92
                          Quote:
                          Originally Posted by Esper View Post
                          I regret making this thread. Thought this time it would be different.
                          Why would it be different? It’s literally SSDD. Same claims and counterclaims.
                          Quote:
                          a) The states with least strict gun purchasing laws have the highest gun death ratio to population.
                          Other studies show no clear or significant difference. Some studies focus on just homicides and don’t differentiate between self defense or not.

                          https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_59f0807ce4b01ecaf1a3e838/amp
                          Quote:

                          So finally we found a study with data from the CDC, the NRA-ILA, and The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. It seems like as unbiased a data source as any. It compared the averages of states where background checks are required for all gun sales, including private ones. And the average gun-related homicide rate per 100,000 people among gun control states (3.31) was lower than those with no regulation of private gun sales (4.28).

                          But there’s a problem. Two gun control states, and nine gun rights states had too few gun homicides to calculate a rate, and were left out of the study. Rather than ignore this important result, my students and I created a 2x2 table, with high (1) and low (0) gun homicide rate states, and those that regulate private sales (1), and those that do not (0). And here are our results.


                          In comparing our observations to a random model, we found that there was little to no difference in the results. We cannot conclude that states that regulate private gun sales have a higher, or lower, gun homicide rate.
                          Quote:
                          b) Bump stocks are parts that can be added to a semi-automatic weapon to make it shoot as fast as an automatic weapon. It's what the shooter in Las Vegas last year used.

                          Luckily, it looks like there is a chance to get those restricted/removed/outlawed/etc. since the NRA apparently doesn't sell very many of them and is looking for some good PR with a token effort.
                          NRA doesn’t sell any. Any ban would be pointless as there are other legal objects that give the same effect and anyone who practices enough can do the same with just a finger. Look up bumpfire without a bumpstock on YouTube.
                          Plus a bumpstock is easily made on a 3D printer. It’s plastic and a spring.
                          Reply With Quote
                            #71    
                          Old March 9th, 2018 (11:29 AM).
                          BronzeHeart92's Avatar
                          BronzeHeart92 BronzeHeart92 is offline
                             
                            Join Date: Jun 2017
                            Location: Finland
                            Gender: Male
                            Nature: Bold
                            Posts: 150
                            Yes, we must always keep this discussion going. If repealing the 2nd is ever going to happen, anti-gun voices have to drown out the pro-gun ones. After all, the children of America deserves to live out their lives without fear.
                            Reply With Quote
                              #72    
                            Old March 9th, 2018 (12:11 PM).
                            LDSman LDSman is offline
                               
                              Join Date: Dec 2017
                              Posts: 92
                              Quote:
                              Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                              Yes, we must always keep this discussion going. If repealing the 2nd is ever going to happen, anti-gun voices have to drown out the pro-gun ones. After all, the children of America deserves to live out their lives without fear.
                              The 2nd will never get repealed. Too many justifiable uses of firearms occur everyday. Nice appeal to emotion though. Just what I’ve come to expect from the antigun crowd.
                              Reply With Quote
                                #73    
                              Old March 9th, 2018 (12:42 PM). Edited March 9th, 2018 by BronzeHeart92.
                              BronzeHeart92's Avatar
                              BronzeHeart92 BronzeHeart92 is offline
                                 
                                Join Date: Jun 2017
                                Location: Finland
                                Gender: Male
                                Nature: Bold
                                Posts: 150
                                Quote:
                                Originally Posted by LDSman View Post
                                The 2nd will never get repealed. Too many justifiable uses of firearms occur everyday. Nice appeal to emotion though. Just what I’ve come to expect from the antigun crowd.
                                Well, I'm not really trying to appeal to anything. Just simply stating the basic facts. Now, I have indeed mentioned it many times but I really have to wonder why you Americans need guns while we Europeans don't have that right (and in fact CAN'T have that right. Any such attempt would be turned down by EU.) and yet we still do fine in our daily lives. Yes, the 2nd Amendment might have made sense back when it was written but I hardly can find any justifications for it in today's world. And no, protection against a supposedly tyrannical government doesn't count. You can't imagine how tired I am of that particular argument.
                                Reply With Quote
                                  #74    
                                Old March 9th, 2018 (10:37 PM). Edited March 9th, 2018 by ShinyUmbreon189.
                                ShinyUmbreon189's Avatar
                                ShinyUmbreon189 ShinyUmbreon189 is offline
                                VLONE coming soon
                                   
                                  Join Date: Mar 2012
                                  Location: Chicago
                                  Age: 26
                                  Gender: Male
                                  Nature: Relaxed
                                  Posts: 1,407
                                  Who said we need guns? There's a difference between a want and a need. Some people have guns for protection, some for hobbies, hunting, going to the range, etc because it's a right we have unless you have a criminal record (violent misdemeanors and all felonies) . The only people that NEED guns are police because there's savages and nut cases running around in the streets concealed with a pistol or even submachine guns, some are even crazy enough to strap a sawed-off or a rifle on them and all which are illegal for them to have. This leads into law abiding citizens wanting a gun for their own protection, especially if they live in or near any bad neighborhoods; while lot's of other law abiding citizens have them because they enjoy shooting (and no, not people). I'm sure you've heard it many times but for the millionth time gang violence is the main cause of gun violence in America, or just criminals in general. Rarely will you ever hear about a law abiding citizen catching murder cases, unless they're mentally ill. Which then they shouldn't have a gun for not just others safety but theirs as well. Anyway you slice it, banning the 2nd Amendment will only hurt law abiding citizens and there's many law abiding citizens that have firearms to protect them and their families and they will use if necessary, and some have had to.
                                  I'm also smart enough to know civilians don't stand a chance against a tyrannical government. But if that were to ever happen I'd bet the military would split and help out the civilians because they're fighting for the Americans to keep their rights intact, those would be the true Americans.

                                  Why should the 2nd Amendment be erased? If school shootings is your response... I'm sorry, but I've heard that way too many times. Banning guns won't stop mass murders. Evil people will do evil deeds. It doesn't matter what path lies in front of them. If they want to achieve something through hatred, they will find a way.
                                  __________________
                                  Reply With Quote
                                    #75    
                                  Old March 9th, 2018 (11:41 PM).
                                  gimmepie's Avatar
                                  gimmepie gimmepie is offline
                                   
                                  Join Date: May 2012
                                  Location: Australia
                                  Age: 22
                                  Gender: Male
                                  Nature: Adamant
                                  Posts: 17,859
                                  Quote:
                                  Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 View Post
                                  Banning guns won't stop mass murders. Evil people will do evil deeds. It doesn't matter what path lies in front of them. If they want to achieve something through hatred, they will find a way.
                                  Weird how all the places with better gun control have fewer mass killing then...
                                  __________________
                                  Reply With Quote
                                  Reply

                                  Quick Reply

                                  Join the conversation!

                                  Create an account to post a reply in this thread, participate in other discussions, and more!

                                  Create a PokéCommunity Account

                                  Sponsored Links
                                  Thread Tools

                                  Posting Rules
                                  You may not post new threads
                                  You may not post replies
                                  You may not post attachments
                                  You may not edit your posts

                                  BB code is On
                                  Smilies are On
                                  [IMG] code is On
                                  HTML code is Off
                                  Minimum Characters Per Post: 25

                                  Forum Jump


                                  All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:45 AM.